Sonny Liston vs Rocky Marciano

Well Archie Moore defeated Nino Valdez to become the rightful contender. As for Patterson, he was a smaller sized cruiser with day before weigh ins. Don't pretend that if Tyson or AJ's best win was a 6'0 190ish pound opponent, no matter how young or skilled he was, wouldn't be held against him. But Liston gets a pass, strangely Rocky doesn't, even though Liston, Rocky, Patterson could all be said to be contemporaries.

 

Sure, but lack of size isn't mentioned as a black mark against Liston but against Marciano. It has to go both ways

 

Marciano would have fought Valdez, but Valdez lost to Archie Moore. Therefore, despite their respective dates of birth, Moore still proved himself to be the better fighter between he and Valdez, even if Moore was 100 years old at 180 pounds and Valdez was 25 and 225 pounds, Moore beat him fair and square. He deserved the fight with Marciano between he and Valdez.

I don't know how Wepner was ranked when Liston fought him, that's why I specified or meant to specify, Liston's BEST opponents. But even Williams would be a large cruiser by today's standards. There are 6'3 215 pound CW's come fight night.

But the size of Liston's best opponents isn't held against him for the most part. It is relentlessly held against Rocky. So either the size of the opposition matters or it doesn't.

 

Liston fought the best around, no matter what the size.

Tyson's wins in his prime included a 221 pound Tucker, a 217 pound Thomas, a 218 pound Berbick, and a 212 pound Spinks. They weren't exactly monstrous compared to guys like Dejohn, Williams, and Valdez.

I'm not one of those who think guys like Liston, Ali, couldn't compete today because of the size of heavyweights. I think once you get over 200 pounds, it starts to matter less.

Usyk the second best heavyweight today was the size of Ali, and Liston.

Fury, the best fighter today, in his only bout that wasn't a win was against an opponent who was..... 212 pounds.

Untrue. Neither Wilder nor AJ have a win remotely that good. It would boost their status considerably.

Spinks got up once. Patterson didn't get up at all in the first bout and got up only twice in the second. Not sure what you're point is. Are you suggesting because Patterson managed to get up once more than Spinks in the rematch it detracts from Liston's win?

Tyson's best win was a blown up lightheavy...

Times were very different back then. They didn't have the nutrition, supplements, or technology we did no. Their was absolutely no reason Charles, Walcott, and Moore at their advanced age should've done so well in that era. It raises serious questions about the quality's era.

Marciano and Liston were not contemporaries just because their careers overlapped by two years or so. Ali and Holmes' careers interlapped by 4 years. Tyson and Holmes two. Would you consider them contemporary?

Also as I stated, Liston was public enemy number one back then. It's no surprise he wasn't favored against many champions of the past.

Regardless, your claim that none favored him over Marciano was false. Before Ali, some thought he was better than even Louis.

No but you made the following ones correct?
https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...being-a-harder-puncher-than-joe-louis.704127/
https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/max-baer-would-beat-all-of-prime-listons-resume.653380/
https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/early-90s-tyson-would-wreck-liston-in-a-slug-fest.652989/
https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...hink-rocky-is-blown-out-vs-liston-but.651017/

Clear as day, you don't think highly of Liston, and try to tear down him and his resume. Least you can do is own up to it like Chok.

Here's another one https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/michael-spinks-vs-sonny-liston-hw.594488/ where you tried to suggest Spinks had as much as a prayer against Liston. Naturally this didn't go over like you'd hoped, and you then resorted to attacking Liston and his resume (particularly Machen) which I suspect was your motive all along.

 

Yes Moore defeated the number 1 challenger Valdes to become the rightful challenger.
The question you need to ask yourself is.
When Valdes was the number 1 challenger.53 & 54,why didn't Rocky fight him?

NB I don't do pretend.

 

Interesting video, Liston and Whitehurst. Liston looks off balance a lot, sometimes clumsy, and Whitehurst looks elusive and game. Liston often lifts the back foot when he jabs, and when he throws the right, that probably would be exploited by a lot of fighters. Whitehurst caught SL with a right hand over Liston's jab in the first round that made SL "dance" a little. Unless SL improved a lot later, he might have always been over rated as a boxer. He is obviously bigger and stronger than Whitehurst, but he does not look like a Larry Holmes boxing or using his jab. Like the Peralta fight for Foreman, fights like this, if they were more available at the time would have shown the public that the Ali loss by SL was not "shocking."

Liston looked impressive knocking Patterson out twice, but this fight and probably others that were not filmed show that SL had a lot of flaws. I recently saw a video done in 1992 of a 1958 SL opponent talking about his fight with SL which he lost on a cut. He said that a fighter "would have to be dead" to get hit by SL's right hand because he telegraphed it and it was easy to see. This fighter said that he had SL "on his bicycle" and "backing up and holding" because SL couldn't deal with him on the inside. He said that promoters tried to get SL to fight him again but SL refused, saying that the guy was "too dirty." I remember reading an article about Jimmy McCarter, a guy who beat SL as an amateur and later sparred with him who was not impressed by SL and especially by his heart. I also saw an old Ring magazine from before the first Patterson fight, they had a poll of 100 boxing people, they were about 50-50 on who would win. The "invincible" SL myth probably came from people who were impressed by the Patterson fights.

Liston might not have been as durable, skilled, or tough as the myth made him out to be. Some who had seen him demolish Patterson twice and not seen him against Whitehurst and others might have over rated him. Not saying he wasn't a good fighter, just that he might not have been as good as advertised.

 

Max Baer probably would have beaten Liston's best opponents. Are you saying that a focused and trained Max Baer would have NO CHANCE vs the Williams, Machens and Dejohns of the world? And why is being matched against Spinks supposed to be some kind of insult? There are Spinks vs Holyfield, Spinks vs prime Holmes, Spinks vs Joe Louis etc threads around here. Are they being insulted?

And I can just as easily say that you're trying to discredit Joe Louis by saying Liston hits harder. Why is discrediting Louis ok but a big no no for Liston? And yes, I think Louis would beat Liston. I'll comment on the rest later.

 

Its already been proven Liston fought plenty of guys in the high 190's Read The Posts!

 

Yes, but it isn't held against him like it is Rocky or other fighters . That's what I'm saying.

 

Doubtful

I literally never said this. I'd favor Machen, and Williams over Baer. Probably not Dejohn.

Baer didn't have much of a jab at all, and was a worse boxer than Machen, and Williams. His defense was also inferior to both. Yes, he had ungodly power (likely hit just as hard if not harder than Liston) but that power means nothing if you're not able to put it use against your opponent which I don't think he does.

It's not, but your reasoning for it is. Trying to build up Spinks, while simultaneously discrediting Liston and his resume. You tried so hard to convince people Spinks had a chance, and genuinely seemed upset people weren't biting.

OK.

I wasn't "discrediting Louis" just because I don't think he hits harder than Liston, nor did I accuse you of doing the same for believing vice versa but coupled with the fact that you made multiple threads tearing down Liston and his resume, suggested Spinks had a chance and resorted to attacking Liston when you didn't get the responses you want, and called Liston a "stationary fighter who occasionally threw a combo" (not even remotely true), it tells me you seem to have a problem with him.

Take your time.

 

Valdes was the number 1 challenger in53 & 54.Marciano had plenty of time to defend against him BEFORE Nino lost to Moore.

Liston did not fight 22 guys under 190lbs .He not fight 8 guys under 180lbs.

 

" Liston looks off balance a lot, sometimes clumsy".

Never heard that said about Marciano?

 

Well, as an aside, I'd take Baer over Williams in a firefight to the finish because of his chin and I think he could take Machen or Dejohn or Folley. And I would think that, regardless if those men fought Liston or not. Which brings me to my next point.

I think that the men on Liston's resume get overrated simply BECAUSE they were victims of Liston, not in spite of it. Valdez lost to Liston, but a younger Valdez also lost to Archie Moore. Imagine if Valdez for whatever reason, never fought Liston but only Moore. If I bring up Valdez as a young, top contender well over 200 pounds that Moore beat, it would go like this

Me: Moore beat Valdez who was well over 200 pounds

You: Whatever, Valdez was an unskilled oaf with 2 left feet.

But because he lost to Liston, now he's this big skilled man who could compete in any era. If you think that about Valdez, I have no problem. I do have a problem if the only reason you say that is because he lost to Liston.

 

Machen would've boxed circles around Baer it wouldn't even be close.

Their was nothing wrong with Williams chin'. He was only knocked out in his prime by an ATG puncher and took quite a bit of punishment before going down. Sometimes, he even got the better of the exchanges which he wouldn't be able to do if his chin was half as bad as depicted.

His defense was also worlds better than Baer's.

Now you're just flat out putting words in my mouth. I've never called Valdez an "unskilled oaf" (though I've probably said as much about Carnera). Valdez was a decent puncher with all right skills, but very inconsistent. He wasn't as good as Williams, but still a good fighter for his time or else he wouldn't have reached number 1.

Also Marciano notoriously never fought Valdez despite being his number one, so I wouldn't bring him up in a thread like this in an argument on behalf of Rocky. Fwiw, I think Rocky would've beaten Valdez, but he hits the canvas and takes some serious punishment imo.

 

And Archie was also the legit contender for marcianos HW title on account of beating legit heavyweight contenders aswell. The man Sonny beat to become champion however, he operated as a LH himself, was #1 contender to Archie Moore …and wound up winning the HW title out of beating the current LH champion. Imagine that? The only guy to win the HW title from the LH champ! In fact Floyd only beat one heavyweight contender, Tommy Jackson, on a split verdict. Whereas when Moore challenged for the HW title he had beaten Henry, Baker and Valdes. Three times as many Real heavyweights.

Marciano put Walcott one fight away from retirement.

I believe Lastarza, Savold, Mathews, Layne, Joe Louis all had ratings when Marciano beat them.

same for Rocky.

it matters less once you get into the period in history where it was possible for 200lb plus fighters to dominate the division. For the hundred years before this point the science had not allowed this to happen.

Heavier men were never a consideration until a much later period. It’s why nobody was looking for the next Primo Carnera.

It’s like talking about the advantages of bicycles against a horse before the motorcycle came along. They both have two wheels but it didn’t matter until the engine was installed.

This has been done to death. Initially valdes was supposed to rematch Charles in an elimination because at the time Valdes simply had too many recent losses to be taken seriously, but Valdes manager refused. Charles, who was prepared to fight Valdes again, flattened Satterfeild in Valdes place and got the shot instead. Remember much later even Satterfeild would put Valdes into perspective himself wiping the floor with Valdes. Even so, Valdes was due to be next after Charles but instead there was way more interest in a Charles rematch. So Marciano v Charles II took place instead. After this Valdes lost an eliminatior to Moore. But between these chances Valdes totally sucked against James J Parker in front of the New York crowd which really set him back. There was talk of a winter match in Cuba but tax reasons prevented it. In truth Valdes just blew his eliminatiors and was unable to overshadow even Don Cockell who had the second most valuable title in boxing and was more impressive in fights that he won on the west coast when there was pressure on a title fight happening in the West. Moore was the outstanding contender in any case. Not Valdes.